Official Report 247KB pdf
We move to item 4, which is petition PE116 from James Strang. This is the final item on the agenda. Members have a note from the clerk, which explains the issues. The petition is general and relates to ensuring that aspects of Scots law are compatible with the obligations of article 6 of the European convention on human rights. The specific argument that is made in the petition relates to the Parole Board for Scotland, members of which are appointed by the Scottish Executive. The petition calls for the establishment of a forum
It might be possible not only to note the petition but, in effect, to do nothing. I am for doing nothing. That might mean noting it; I do not see any point in spending time on the matter. The petitioner raises three issues, one of which is the appointment of the Parole Board. I cannot see any ECHR problem in that, but if there is, it can be examined in the review of the ECHR, on which the Government is about to introduce a bill.
Yes—as would a human rights commission.
Therefore, all three issues are exhausted. My fear is that if we do not merely note a petition such as this, where does it end? As you know, dozens of matters are potentially ECHR non-compliant—that will be examined when there is an ECHR bill. If someone says, "Here is a petition about the Parole Board" and we conduct an inquiry on it, next week we might get a petition on—
Hold on. I am not suggesting that we should conduct an inquiry.
I am exaggerating a little.
Yes, you are.
If we decided not to note the petition but to deal with it, and the following week a petition on planning was submitted—which would probably be more legitimate—would we examine that? We have many things to do and the Executive is reviewing the matter, so we should not spend time examining individual suggestions such as this.
It is in the spirit of parliamentary procedures that, through the Public Petitions Committee, people can face the Parliament with an issue such as this. That is great—he deserves a reply.
It would be interesting to find out whether the petitioner is happy with the response because, as well as sending the petition on to this committee, the convener of the Public Petitions Committee passed it on to Jim Wallace, who has responded. It would be interesting to know whether the petitioner is happy with that response.
I agree.
Mr Strang might be happy with the response from Mr Wallace. We should contact Mr Strang and pass on a copy of the response, if John McAllion has not already done so.
The petitioner has raised a valid issue under the system that has been set up by the Scottish Parliament. We would do the petition an injustice by merely noting it, but I accept that, as Gordon Jackson said, we cannot deal with every issue. We know that the Crown Office and the Executive are examining the matter. The committee could state that we feel that the guy has made a valid point. We could pass that to the Crown Office or the Executive and ask, "Will you consider that?" That would be a positive action, which would be fine.
Two of the three points—the active court situation and the human rights commission—can be responded to in the way that we have discussed this morning. On the more general point about the membership of the Parole Board, I would like to get a view from the Scottish Human Rights Centre about its immediate response to that; we can do that by letter. When we receive a response to that, we should dispatch it to the Crown Office on the basis that Phil Gallie suggested. I do not want us to dismiss matters out of hand when the petition is not frivolous.
To avoid doubt, I think that the point that the man has made is valid. I am not saying that the petition is frivolous. I quite fancied the second point about recall as an ECHR point—although it seems that the courts have said that it is not. It is a valid point, but my difficulty is about what we can do about it when so much stuff is being done elsewhere.
That will always be an issue with petitions. We will ask Professor Alan Miller for a response on the general point. We will wait and see what that response is.
Meeting closed at 12:07.
Previous
Legal Aid Inquiry